Opinion: $120-million can be a big help

House Speaker Tom Feeney offers two excuses for refusing to delay the intangibles tax cut he pushed through last session: Such a delay would be bad for the economy, and the money it would save -- about $120-million -- is minuscule compared to what's needed to erase the deficit. If Feeney's first excuse is questionable, his second is downright offensive. To keep his pet tax cut, Feeney is inviting the elimination of multiple programs -- any one of which, individually, makes up a far smaller slice of the budget than the tax break he fights so hard to protect. If Feeney can put his tax break off-limits with a minimalist argument, why can't those programs do so as well?

"On a scale of things, $120-million is less than a tenth of what we're debating about. I've got to worry first and foremost about the big issues," Feeney said Wednesday.

"Big," like beauty, rests in the eye of the beholder. To us, the "big" issue is that a $120-million benefit for a comfortable few should not be preserved at the expense of vital services relied on by the poor.

What exactly could Feeney's $120-million tax cut buy for Florida? That "drop in the bucket" could buy medical services for 38,000 needy adults ($98-million), plus prescription drugs for another 30,000 low-income seniors ($30-million). It could buy dentures, eye-glasses or hearing aides for 42,000 elderly or disabled Floridians ($75-million), plus pre-kindergarten help for 10,000 migrant and poor children ($34-million). It could buy prenatal care for 5,200 pregnant women ($38-million), critical services and staff for individuals with developmental disabilities ($23-million), drug treatment for 6,800 adults and juveniles ($9-million), new hope for Florida's homeless ($4-million) -- and much more.

Of course, all of those people and services stand to lose the most when the Legislature convenes in special session next week.

Feeney should stick to his first argument. With so many under-$120-million programs facing the budget ax, Floridians are not likely to buy his second.

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright